I agree. It’s a cute idea. Not executed well, technically speaking. Also, I’m not sure why they went a tarted it up like that with that stupid rainbow ring thing. It’s a shame. Lots of potential there.

So is Paul going to be born gay or something? Can they test that now a days? This could have been a better photo a)without the Gay Pride rainbow and b)with better composition. Everything is pretty much in the center. And what’s that thing behind the parents? Location, location, location!!

I remember reading an article (this was back in the early 2000s) about the advancement of “designer baby” technology. They were apparently trying to find a way to scan and program fetuses for hetero- or homosexuality, so that you could choose to have a straight or gay child.

There is definitely a lot wrong with this photo. But for those poking fun at the idea of a rainbow being included, you should know that often babies born after a pregnancy or infant loss are called “rainbow babies.” My guess is that that is what the couple wanted to convey here. The execution is unfortunate, but perhaps we can step back from making jokes about the child’s sexuality.

oh. I guess that explains why it looks more like they’re commemorating their dead son Paul than a baby-bump photo. Still think the rainbow is tacky, though. If they really wanted the effect, the fauxtog could have softened the colors a little bit. Paul deserved better.

Ugh, that rainbow circle is on my photoshop elements, it annoys me. I can’t find a use for it ( I only edit my own photos, I’m not a photographer xP), but I can tell you it doesn’t belong on “professional” photographs lol.